Materialists

Sin Christ Bible...you tell me what definition of sin Christ is supposed to have died for.

I am told by your goodself that "1. Christ died for the sins of the world. Period, all of them, mine and yours and Hitlers'."
stu
______________________________________________

All of them except the rejecting of His death for us. When He died all of mine were in the future.
 
axe what a bunch of insincere garbage you post.

We already discussed this. How many texts do you think we have from 2000 years ago? All the writings put together would fit on a small bookshelf.

josepheus the jewish historian records the existence of Jesus and while there is some dispute as to the fact that a few words regarding the divinity of jesus may have been added. Every scholar accept a few who worte anti jesus books accepts that Josepheus did document the life of Jesus.

Now why will you not comment on the quotes from Russell. Have you nothing to say?
 
Sin Christ Bible...you tell me what definition of sin Christ is supposed to have died for.

I am told by your goodself that "1. Christ died for the sins of the world. Period, all of them, mine and yours and Hitlers'."
stu
______________________________________________
Doubter,

All of them except the rejecting of His death for us. When He died all of mine were in the future.
More...
...then some questions of you ...

1 Last time I raised this, you didn't want to debate it remember..pg 51 ? "...So you can now leave the rest of us to face the consequences of our decisions". Do I take it you have changed your mind ? If so.....

2. Please claify. Is it that you are saying, God is supposed to have sacrificed his own life (if you follow the Trinity concept of things) or Christ's life (if you think Christ is the actual son of God), as atonement for the sin of man up to that point only ? If so, what was the purpose, was it to wipe the slate clean in some way ?

3. If Christ was supposed to have died 2000 odd years ago, you make a truism by saying yours [sin?] would be in the future don't you think? So were you born with or without 'original sin'?

4. If Christ died for(in payment of ?) mans' sins, then why isn't the debt paid. The story goes that God created sin, God made sin unavoidable to mankind, God sent Christ (or God himself) to his death to pay for the sin which God created. Then that should be that. Why is there still sin available to mankind when the score should have been evened?

There is no reason why mankind should have suffered the atrocities of Hitler et al, if the mistake God made by introducing sin in the first place had been atoned by Christ's death according to these stories . So how come Hitler was able to sin in that way? Why should those poor wretched people had to have suffered at the hand of that horrific monster if God's mistake had been paid for. I can only assume that as well as being a homicidal, despotic, tyrannical, megalomaniac, - God also welches on his deals.
 
Josephus?? Is that all you have Jem?
Can you say WEEEAAAK??? Your basing your entire jesus
belief system on that??? Are you kidding me?
Its already been debunked by several scholars.

Lets examine this one more time:

Take, for example, Eusebius who served as an ecclesiastical church historian and bishop. He had great influence in the early Church and he openly advocated the use of fraud and deception in furthering the interests of the Church [Remsberg]. The first mention of Jesus by Josephus came from Eusebius (none of the earlier church fathers mention Josephus' Jesus). It comes to no surprise why many scholars think that Eusebius interpolated his writings. In his Ecclesiastical History, he writes, "We shall introduce into this history in general only those events which may be useful first to ourselves and afterwards to posterity." (Vol. 8, chapter 2). In his Praeparatio Evangelica, he includes a chapter titled, "How it may be Lawful and Fitting to use Falsehood as a Medicine, and for the Benefit of those who Want to be Deceived" (book 12, chapter 32).


But most importantly, Josephus was born in 37AD and therefore
NOT a contemporary of jesus. So AT BEST all you have us hearsay. :D

The paragraph in question DID NOT APPEAR in earlier copies
of Josephus's works, but FIRST APPEARED in the 4th century
during the time of Eusebius, the well known FORGER :D :p

Sorry Jem... but the Josephus crap would not hold up in court.
I have a million references that show its full of holes and likely a compelte fraud.
Ill quote more if you want :D


As for Russel... you havent been paying attention.
I DID comment on it, as did several other people.
We all basically said: SO WHAT.

You quoted a single opinion of one atheist and posed it
as some kind of argument. It is not. Its a mere unsupported statement.

If you would take the time to post a REAL ARGUMENT, there would
be something to discuss, but without any context, your quote
is pretty meaningless.

peace

axeman


Quote from jem:

axe what a bunch of insincere garbage you post.

We already discussed this. How many texts do you think we have from 2000 years ago? All the writings put together would fit on a small bookshelf.

josepheus the jewish historian records the existence of Jesus and while there is some dispute as to the fact that a few words regarding the divinity of jesus may have been added. Every scholar accept a few who worte anti jesus books accepts that Josepheus did document the life of Jesus.

Now why will you not comment on the quotes from Russell. Have you nothing to say?
More...
 
In case you missed it JEM, Josephus doesnt cut it because:

Josephus was born in 37AD and therefore
NOT a contemporary of jesus. So AT BEST all you have is hearsay.
And more than likely, FORGED hearsay! LOL :p


So once again, unlike other historical figures, there doesnt
exist a single contemporary historian who mentions jesus!

NOT A ONE!!! Even though the gospels claim he was KNOWN
far and wide, and all the top romans knew him...lmaoooo :p
On top of that.... ZERO artifacts! Zippo! Nada! :p


Can you say COMPLETE MYTHOLOGY!

All together now! MYTH MYTH MYTH! LOL :p

We have as much evidence for the existence of ZEUS! AKA: NONE! :D


peace

axeman
 
Various Shoe quotes on biblical hell:
>There is a deliberate silence...

I find that a very strange position considering what IS written.

>Think about it: we have several passages describing
>heaven, i.e. streets of gold, etc. Where is a similar
>description of hell?

Well, while heaven is gated and bejeweled and paved and glimmering, hells description is merely...well, freakin HOT. We have descriptions how people *respond* to the tortures of hell (see below), but an abyss of flames is not going to evoke a Tom Wolfe like description (I consider Wolfe one of the most annoyingly detailed fiction writers around).

>So I guess what I'll say is that we have very little to go
>on as to what hell will be like, but imo the fire will not
>generally be a literal flesh-searing, Miltonian fire.

Ok, we'll see.

>That's one of my exasperations with most Christians:
>they take apocryphal and/or vision/dream language
>and turn it into something literal for which it was not
>necessarily intended.

Yes, I'm sure you are preparing as we speak to say that Jesus Christ was dreaming or some such thing...

Luke Chapter 16, verses 19-28. For brevity sake I will skip down to the relevent verses, but Jesus is speaking here as verse one starts with "And he {jesus} said also unto his disciples..."

19: There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:
20: And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,
21: And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.
22: And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
23: And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
24: And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame .
25: But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented .
26: And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence .
27: Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house:
28: For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment .

So Jesus himself is speaking here. He is not in parable mode -- he generally indicated when he was in such mode and he additionally here uses the proper names of major Biblical characters. If you research Jesus' parables, I believe you will find that he never used proper names within.

According to Jesus Christ, hell is clearly a place tormented by flame. Also it's clear that once you check in you can't check out. (that is not to say that you can't die there).

JB

PS: continued.
 
More of hell from the mouth of Jesus...

From Mark chapter 9

43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:

45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:

47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:

48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.


In the above words of Jesus it's clear that there are many horrible things that are preferred over "hell fire".


Matthew 18
8 Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.

9 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire.


Apparently Jesus himself felt strong enough about the above version of hell to give this speach (or it is reported) not once, not twice, but at least THREE times...(also found in Matthew 5:29-30)



Matthew 5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.


Recognize that verse? Most don't as they stop reading at the end of the "Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God." part. Yes, the above is directly from the sermon on the mount.


Matthew 25:41
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels


Above, Jesus is using an analogy and writing in the third person. In his parables however, he is still assumed by most Christians to have taught truths rather than falsehoods.

There is more, I swear. This is just from the mouth of Jesus and only a portion of that.

JB

A little final tidbit for TFC:

Matthew 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

Yeah, that's Jesus TFC. Read it in context if you have any questions.
 
1 Last time I raised this, you didn't want to debate it remember..pg 51 ? "...So you can now leave the rest of us to face the consequences of our decisions". Do I take it you have changed your mind ? If so.....
stu
__________________________________________________

I didn't want to debate it because of time restraints. Sometimes I need to make a semi-honest living.

The leaving us to face our own consequences was in regard to the things that people who accept Christ have to endure or face. 1. We could be wrong and perhaps have waisted a lot of time. 2. Ridicule and derision. 3. Rejection because we don't participate in drinking or other activities we can do without. 4. The apostles were supposedly martyred. etc.

Atheists have decided to reject or simply not believe and they will have to live with the consequences of their decisions as well. I'm just trying to lay out some of the things around those decisions.
 
Atheists have decided to reject or simply not believe and they will have to live with the consequences of their decisions as well.


Yup... we will live HAPPY lives, GUILT free, FEAR free,
church free (time wasted), and free to THINK for ourselves,
knowing full well that we can explain our position with REASON,
without sounding like cult whackos :D

AAaaaaaaaaaaahhh the good life, the moral life, the intellectually
honest life, the self VALUED life, of a FREE THINKER.


peace

axeman
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top